In a nutshell, the much-maligned Bush Administration recognized the Fannie-Freddie problem early on. Slowly, relentlessly, from the 1980s on, mostly Democrat-controlled Congresses pushed both quasi-governmental entities to prod banks into ever more liberal loan policies that would allow less and less qualified loan applicants to obtain mortgages and—often for the first time—purchase housing, regardless of whether they were financially able to carry their mortgages.

FRAME all of your positions and assertions are based on faulty premises and false data. all of this has been pointed out to you with facts. you insist on clinging to misinformation and so there is no reason to continue to engage you on these matters.

Quote

Would you not do the same to save the nation?

again, faulty premise. you suppose that without the breaking of the law the country would fail. i suggest that without the law, the country has already failed.if a leader can do as he/she pleases, there are, in theory, no limits...all for the "greater good". we can look to history and see how many leaders have gone this way, the what was the end result. most of those leaders did it with the consent of the people because they, like you, thought it was worth it.

Logged

.....The greatest changes occur in their country without their cooperation. They are not even aware of precisely what has taken place. They suspect it; they have heard of the event by chance. More than that, they are unconcerned with the fortunes of their village, the safety of their streets, the fate of their church and its vestry. They think that such things have nothing to do with them, that they belong to a powerful stranger called “the government.” They enjoy these goods as tenants, without a sense of ownership, and never give a thought to how they might be improved.....

How do they say it?The ends justify the means? I do not think there is any Constitutional authority for the Congress or President to redistribute the wealth of the taxpayer. The premise of the income tax was to pay for the function of government. Just as there is no Constitutional authority for the federal government to engineer social behavior through the tax code.These were powers left to the individual states by the Constitution and powers limited to the federal government for good reason.

if a leader can do as he/she pleases, there are, in theory, no limits...all for the "greater good". we can look to history and see how many leaders have gone this way, the what was the end result. most of those leaders did it with the consent of the people because they, like you, thought it was worth it.

I do not think I would subvert the Constitution or literally wipe my rear end with it. I am a firm believer the government fixing these problems are the root of the problems. Our nation has survived the test of time because of the Constitution limiting the powers of the Federal government. I think the further we have strayed from these principles the deeper the quagmire gets. As states relinquished their responsibilities to the federal government it has grown to an uncontrollable behemoth with an insatiable appetite for power and corruption. And no sense of responsibility for future generations.

The Federal Government violated the Constitution in forcing the Southern states to stay in the union. Truman broke steel worker and oil industry strikes using federal troops in 1946. Federalized National Guard Troops desegregated the University of Mississippi. You're right.

all of those things, and i can name a few more, were wrong. just because one does something wrong, it doesn't excuse the next law breaker.

your question is faulty. it assumes that what was done was needed to save the nation. i think it was not, and that it has made things worse. following your logic, you should applaud the federal government injecting liquidity into the financial markets.

we have had well over 3 years to evaluate the success of the illegal actions. it appears to me that they have failed. not only have they failed here, but they have been an international failure.

Logged

.....The greatest changes occur in their country without their cooperation. They are not even aware of precisely what has taken place. They suspect it; they have heard of the event by chance. More than that, they are unconcerned with the fortunes of their village, the safety of their streets, the fate of their church and its vestry. They think that such things have nothing to do with them, that they belong to a powerful stranger called “the government.” They enjoy these goods as tenants, without a sense of ownership, and never give a thought to how they might be improved.....